Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Mark Duggan shooting inquest in London finally starts...

:rolleyes: well, if you think that shooting other people, or being shot yourself, might ruin your life, or your family life, that might be a good reason not to join a local gang / a police armed response unit, mightn't it??


Although possibly you dont actually want to employ somebody who will shoot somebody and not be bothered
 
Have to agree that what happened here is all the more confusing. Miss J said she saw a man pulled out of the back left door of the car. This presumably was Duggan. He was then, according to her, given CPR by the police. Does this mean he was shot whilst in the car? Is she confusing Duggan and the taxi driver? She also says a policeman went into the back of the car and brought out a gun. How many do we now have? The one he fired, the one found over the fence and the one in the back of the car?

Someone with some knowledge help me here!
 
curiouser and curiouser. I am baffled. Aren't fitups generally supposed to go a bit more smoothly than this? Most of the scenarios I'd dreamed up of how this event happened (some of which blame the cops, some Duggan) are now being contradicted by one witness or another. Can't figure out WTH happened.

Or perhaps the gun levitated itself over a fence by sheer force of will.
you weren't at the levitation of parliament in 1994, were you?
 
vikram dodd @VikramDodd
Firearms officer w42 giving evidence at #duggan inquest. He was the one "shot" by a colleague

vikram dodd @VikramDodd
W42 omitted from initial account his claim #duggan reaching for gun.he says "not a relevant fact" for his initial account
 
Sounds like the Met's 'sheriffs' were keen to loose off some of those dum-dum bullets....:mad:

The bullet that killed Mark Duggan had only recently been authorised for police use before the fatal shooting in 2011, the inquest into his death has heard.

Michael Mansfield QC, for the Duggan family, told the jury on Thursday that the 9mm parabellum ammunition used by a police marksman was "not even in use by all army units" in the UK.

The jury heard that the hollow-point bullet is designed to cause "instantaneous incapacitation" and "mushrooms" on contact with the body. The bullet travelled 30cm down through Duggan's body after hitting him 2cm above his right nipple, jurors were told.
 
Just catching up with this today - what's this about the trajectory of the round to the chest, the fatal shot, that's says he could not have been standing at the time? An execution whilst laying on the ground writhing in pain from the first round?
 
Just catching up with this today - what's this about the trajectory of the round to the chest, the fatal shot, that's says he could not have been standing at the time? An execution whilst laying on the ground writhing in pain from the first round?

Yep.

It seems like the Met's justication for using ammo that even the army declines is on the basis that it 'incapacitates' the victim. Strange then that they'd decide to incapacitate twice over, the second round entering Duggan whilst he was leaning forward from the arm shot.
 
And at an angle of "about 46 degrees" relative to what?

(Sorry, forgotten where I saw that.)

And with hollow-tipped bullets?
 
And at an angle of "about 46 degrees" relative to what?

(Sorry, forgotten where I saw that.)

And with hollow-tipped bullets?

I think that means 46 degrees from what would be upright for Duggan....ie. he was leaning forward towards the 'marksman'.

He told jurors the bullet travelled at an approximately 46-degree angle down through Duggan's chest before exiting his body, before it was eventually found in the minicab.
 
And at an angle of "about 46 degrees" relative to what?

(Sorry, forgotten where I saw that.)

And with hollow-tipped bullets?

I believe the justification for police using hollowpoint rounds has to do with them being less likely to go straight through the target and hit someone else behind them. IIRC hollowpoints are banned for use in warfare under international law, but apparently this doesn't apply to police forces. By the same logic it would be OK to use landmines so long as you only used them on your own citizens.

IMO the only way to stop plods shooting the wrong people is to not give them guns.
 
Yep.

It seems like the Met's justication for using ammo that even the army declines is on the basis that it 'incapacitates' the victim.

Many's the time I've been shot with a normal bullet and carried on about my business pretty much unhindered.
 
Many's the time I've been shot with a normal bullet and carried on about my business pretty much unhindered.

Exactly! After they'd pretty much blown Duggan's arm off, he was still likely to fire back with the shoe box, wasn't he?
 
Sounds like the Met's 'sheriffs' were keen to loose off some of those dum-dum bullets....:mad:


Hollow point bullets are banned by the hague convention for armed forces on the grounds they might cause more injury than a full metal jacketed round. Police use them as they shouldn't go through the person your shooting and you don't have to shoot him so many times.
As their supposed to fire one round and then re asses the target before firing again.
While the Army would shoot him lots of times and then a few more times just to be sure. Then if allowed get something bigger to shoot him with and then throw a few grenades and finally crawl up and bayonet him. So hollow points are really not needed.
 
Back
Top Bottom